//
you're reading...
News

The Internet Officially Hates YOUTUBE, Now

Instead of using the service to bitch, YouTube content creators should form a union and strike. (v/whatever)

submitted 4 hours ago by mamwad

It would be a productive way of telling YouTube to fuck off. Imagine if a good portion of YouTubers decided to hide their channel and stopped making content until YouTube changed their terms of service. Alphabet needs to see that fucking with their userbase has consequences. Bitching isn’t going to amount to shit.
 
 

 

 

[–] TheScattMan 7 points (+9|-2) 3 hours ago 

Free Market. The best ‘union strike’ is to go create a new company or bring your talents to a new company. Obviously this is harder said than done, especially in the real world with non-compete clauses and what not, but I doubt that youtube content creators have a non-compete clause so the battle is less uphill.

 

 

[–] mamwad [S] 3 points (+4|-1) 3 hours ago 

Free market implies content creators have a right to form a union and strike. Also, I think most content creators do not have the capabilities necessary to make an alternative. The fact is that youtube has a near monopoly. It takes a team of lawyers and massive server farms to do what they do. The best chance the content creators have is to take YouTube to task.

 

 

[–] TheScattMan 1 points (+2|-1) 3 hours ago 

First, I do not agree with your definition of Youtube being a Monopoly, and neither would most level headed Economists( a rarity) nowadays. A monopoly is not simply when a company has a holding on a market , I guess we’ll ignore vimeo(still shitty not a realistic alternative for us) and others, but there has to be no realistic opportunity for another competitor. Opportunity is the key word. I can’t imagine that you could get even any lawyer to try to present Youtube as a monopoly. First you would have to ignore the other video hosting services, but secondly there just is in no way any restrictions which are undermining opportunities for competitors. If Youtube does have a monopoly it’s because they are currently so much better than everyone else, not because there isn’t opportunity for competition. That is the key difference if you want to start talking Monopolies.

You are correct, the content creators have every right to form a union and strike. But other content creators have every right not to strike and fill the void of those which leave. Like any strike, there will always be a content creator who buckles after two weeks of the strike and goes back to making videos. Once that creator does that, then all the others will fall into place out of jealousy or w/e. They content creators can and should strike, but it will not be successful without a serious long term risk for Youtube, which would have to be in the form of a competitor. Which, will happen if it every comes that big Youtubers all strike together ( I doubt it), just because the demand will be SO high that it would be STUPID for someone not to come in and give an alternative platform for all these big name Youtubers to post to while they strike Youtube.

Last point, you are kinda right about the lawyers and massive server farms. But, no company should ever come in to the game with the object to be Youtube right away. All it takes is a small ‘mom and pop’ to come along who is willing to fill the void, and presents a product of comparable standard. The requirement for entry is high, but not as high as you would think. It would be similar to any Entrepreneur who is trying to start a small business. It is a risk, though, like all business. Shit, I’d do it myself if I had the coding talent and/or money.

 

 

[–] murgerbeister 1 points (+1|-0) 1.1 hours ago 

This doesn’t address the basic problem… Google can’t attract paying advertisers for that content. Google would love to monetize everything that gets uploaded I am sure because that’d be money in their pockets too.

If the “unmonetizable” make their own service, they will find out first hand how difficult it is to “monetize” their drivel, and have to front the money for the iron to serve their crap for free.

And BTW isn’t ‘strike’ a telling word? Employees ‘strike’ against their employer. If that is their mindset they are never going to get off the couch against google.

 

 

[–] TheScattMan 2 points (+2|-0) 59 minutes ago 

I totally agree. But, Google also has to realize that this kind of destroys Youtube’so mission statement in a way, and it would probably be in Google’s best, longterm interest to negotiate with advertisers as to take the good with the bad. It looses Google some money, because ad revenue goes down, but it arguably saves Google a lot of money in the long run if this leads to a growth of a competitor.

 

 

[–] bagano1 -3 points (+5|-8) 3 hours ago 

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FREE MARKET.

Fucking idiot, that’s why you get taken advantage of.

 

 

[–] TheScattMan 0 points (+4|-4) 3 hours ago 

Yes there is. Prove to me there isn’t. There is a lot of regulation out of the ass in many industries which unequally hurts small businesses in entry fees, legal costs, and fixed costs; but, it is still relatively free. I can agree that regulation has started to get out of control and we need to do something about it, but the internet medium is really not as effected by regulation (yet; but, they are trying.)

There is nothing stopping a skilled and motivated person from creating a voat-esk competitor to YouTube. There is usually a lack of market demand, but that is not the case right now. I am willing to bet that if the site was comparable to Youtube; in coding and monetary standards- but offered freedom of content, that many Youtubers at a minimum would start dual posting their videos to both sites. They would have no reason not to. It would present a little extra money for them, for 2 minutes of extra work per video, and long term it gives them more security and profit potential.

2 replies

 

 

[–] sonnenrad 5 points (+5|-0) 3 hours ago 

Honestly, I could see this YouTube crackdown coming from a mile away. Google doesn’t give two shits about free speech, especially that which speaks out against their benefactors. Instead of trying to stay within a rigged system, they should focus on creating a new one without censorship and allow YouTube to die.

 

 

[–] Sakusha 3 points (+3|-0) 3 hours ago 

A lot of big content creators have signed with networks such as Polaris and Big Frame, and likely have to continue using YouTube for contractual reasons. It isn’t likely that large channels can go elsewhere, at least not for a while.

 

 

[–] TheScattMan 1 points (+1|-0) 2.8 hours ago 

Yeah, but that’s not Youtube’s problem. Secondly, they wouldn’t have to leave Youtube. They would just need to start dual-posting to another site, and rely on voat, reddit, etc to go watch those videos on the new site (similar to sli.mg replacing Imgur for Voaters and some subreddits)

 

 

[–] Sakusha 1 points (+1|-0) 2.8 hours ago 

In the meantime, though, the content creators that rely on their channel for income or who create videos with a little bit more than a shoestring budget will be hemorrhaging money. Even if you use your channel to promote offsite content, the turnaround is going to be nowhere near 100%, just like rallying for people to join Voat hasn’t caused a 100% turnover even though they have many good reasons to come.

 

 

[–] ratsmack 2 points (+2|-0) 2.1 hours ago 

If there is enough of them that this is happening to, a class action lawsuit usually gets some attention.

 

 

[–] bourbonexpert 1 points (+1|-0) 2 hours ago 

or create a new site that offers what youtube offers without the bullshit.

like voat.

 

 

[–] bagano1 1 points (+5|-4) 3 hours ago 

Oh, so unions are great now, eh?

Given any thought as to why unions are great for ordinary working men as well too?

 

 

[–] mamwad [S] 0 points (+4|-4) 3 hours ago 

Providing they are actually democratic, they are great. Better working conditions, more benefits, better pay.

 

 

[–] bagano1 0 points (+2|-2) 2.6 hours ago 

No shit. I cringe at the morons who oppose unions. These corporate assholes sit on top of stacks of cash, keep firing people to pay themselves more, and stupid cunts keep yelling, “Unions are bad!” from the counter of the 7-11 they work at.

Dumb shits.

1 reply

 

 

[–] rwbj 0 points (+0|-0) 27 minutes ago 

There’s a problem with this idea. Ironically it’s the same problem the big name sites also have. Have you noticed when any of the big sites try to do something like put their content behind a no-ad block wall, or a registration wall, or whatever it’s imminently reversed in relatively short order? The internet is a big place. There are countless people willing to produce good high quality content for free.

Ultimately the major sites and major youtube creators don’t actually offer anything inherently unique. Their size is more a result of marketing and market positioning than of actual merit. Go look at the biggest YouTube streamers and you’ll find nearly all of them started in the 2010-2011 range when YouTube streaming became big. Right place, right time. They leave? No big deal. It’s suddenly somebody else’s right place, right time moment and the people will just move on.

 

 

[–] A_M_Swallow 0 points (+0|-0) 1.1 hours ago 

Rival sites for showing videos are: Dailymotion Vimeo

 

 

[–] collegetoker 0 points (+0|-0) 1.3 hours ago 

What about just moving the content over to minds.com?

 

 

[–] yjGVlGF6b 0 points (+1|-1) 2.2 hours ago 

Fuck unions. If you want change, you go out and create that change, not use the same shitty service that flicked your nuts to begin with.

Advertisements

About Community Publishers Alliance

A volunteer community service alliance of non-profit, bi-partisan, free internet publishers and WIKI blogging members of the public, Congress and non-profit human rights organizations. We are supported by over 200M voters and hundreds of pro-bono lawyers and public law firms who will not hesitate to 100% legally terminate any party who is violating our Constitutional rights or censoring our public news, wiki and media sites. Our sites are engaged in no commercial activity and only link to generally known hyperlinks on the web. Any assertion to the contrary is a censorship action which will be actionable.

Discussion

No comments yet.

Submit a news article:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to follow the News and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Most Clicked –

Categories

Member of The Internet Defense League